Citation Nr: 21021198 Decision Date: 04/12/21 Archive Date: 04/12/21 DOCKET NO. 16-09 138 DATE: April 12, 2021 ORDER Service connection for discoid lupus is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that discoid lupus began during active service or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for discoid lupus are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served from November 1979 to September 1983. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a July 2014 rating decision. In June 2020 the Board remanded this case for further development. Service Connection - Discoid Lupus Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The Veteran contends that he has service-connected discoid lupus. He reports that various skins conditions that he experienced in the service were related his discoid lupus. The Board agrees the Veteran has a current diagnosis of discoid lupus, thus satisfying the first element of the test. The Veteran also satisfies the second element; there was an in-service incurrence of a disease. While in service, the Veteran had clear cysts, acne vulgaris, sebaceous cyst, and rashes. However, there is not a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service skin conditions. Therefore, service connection cannot be granted. The Veteran was not diagnosed with discoid lupus until around 2007 - 2008. He was not treated for discoid lupus prior to or while in service. According to VA examiners, the skin conditions that the Veteran experienced while in service are unrelated to lupus. The August 2019 VA examiner stated that the Veteran’s in-service contact/allergic dermatitis was too far removed from the Veteran’s diagnosis of discoid lupus to be connected. Moreover, the examiner stated the Veteran’s long-standing history of tobacco use is likely a contributing factor to the discoid lupus. The opinion from the VA examiner is given great weight for purposes of not establishing a nexus between discoid lupus and contact/allergic dermatis, However, the opinion is focused on contact/allergic dermatitis and not any other skin condition that the Veteran had while in service. Therefore, the Board is unable to use it to determine whether there is a nexus between other in-service skin maladies and lupus. On VA examination in July 2020, the examiner addressed each of the Board’s inquiries raised in the underlying June 2020 remand. The examiner explained why the following skin problems that were documented in service are unrelated to discoid lupus: September 1979 report of clear cysts, December 1979 rash, September 1980 report of acne vulgaris and a sebaceous cyst, June 1982 report of a rash. The VA examiner concluded that the Veteran’s discoid lupus was less likely than not connected to the Veteran’s service. The opinion discusses multiple skin related health issues with sufficient detail to show a lack of service connection. Due to its thoroughness, this opinion is given great weight. While the Veteran believes his discoid lupus is service connected, he does not have the requisite medical knowledge, training, or experience to be able to render a competent medical opinion regarding the cause of such a medically complex disability. The probative evidence does not show that the current disability is related to the Veteran’s active military service. In reaching this decision, the Board considered the doctrine of reasonable doubt, however, the doctrine is not for application and service connection must be denied JOHN Z. JONES Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Chalker, Phillip The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.